“The GenRich—who account for ten percent of the American
population—[will] all carry synthetic genes. All aspects of the economy,
the media, the entertainment industry, and the knowledge industry are
controlled by members of the GenRich class…

“Naturals work as low-paid service providers or as laborers.
[Eventually] the GenRich class and the Natural class will become
entirely separate species with no ability to crossbreed, and with as
much romantic interest in each other as a current human would have for a
chimpanzee.

“Many think that it is inherently unfair for some people to have
access to technologies that can provide advantages while others, less
well-off, are forced to depend on chance alone, [but] American society
adheres to the principle that personal liberty and personal fortune are
the primary determinants of what individuals are allowed and able to do.

“Indeed, in a society that values individual freedom above all
else, it is hard to find any legitimate basis for restricting the use of
repro[grammed]-genetics. I will argue [that] the use of reprogenetic
technologies is inevitable. [W]hether we like it or not, the global
marketplace will reign supreme.”

Here is another gem, from Gregory Stock, former director of the
program in Medicine, Technology, and Society at the UCLA School of
Medicine:

“Even if half the world’s species were lost [during genetic
experiments], enormous diversity would still remain. When those in the
distant future look back on this period of history, they will likely see
it not as the era when the natural environment was impoverished, but as
the age when a plethora of new forms—some biological, some
technological, some a combination of the two—burst onto the scene. We
best serve ourselves, as well as future generations, by focusing on the
short-term consequences of our actions rather than our vague notions
about the needs of the distant future.”

One scientist says we might lose half of all species getting where we
“want to go,” genetically speaking, and the other says the process will
inevitably be guided by wealth and the free market, thus creating two
distinct classes of humans, the higher of which has far superior
abilities—and they’ll run things.

Aren’t you thrilled? If your children make it through, they may turn out to be half-biological, half-technological.

Plexiglass head, two cameras for eyes, titanium feet. Whatever.

They were aiming to become the next Mozart? And instead they wound
up burning down half the city? Just a glitch in the research. Take the
long view. Don’t worry, be happy.

The debate comes down to who controls, yes, the philosophy. Not the
science. Is each human merely and only a system, or is he something
more, inhabiting a physical form?

We already know what the vast majority of brain researchers and
geneticists believe, as well as the governments and corporations and
universities and foundations that make important decisions.

Of course, these days, the college faculty department considered to
be the least important, the most useless, a mere appendage waiting for
those with wisdom to put it out of its misery and kill it off…is the
philosophy department.

That leaves us to take up the philosophic argument.

Not Lee Silver at Princeton or Gregory Stock or Bill Gates or George
Soros or David Rockefeller or the Pope or Stephen Hawking or Obama or
the Clintons or Monsanto or Dow or the Bush family or PBS or FOX or
socialists or Communists or liberals or conservatives or some
wackadoodle at Harvard or MIT or UCLA.

Us.

Notice this: Nowhere in the scenarios for a brave new utopia do we
see mention of the human creative impulse. That’s ignored. Instead,
somehow, new genes will take care of the whole issue. Those who receive
the right ones will suddenly spring full-blown, as Michelangelos.

This is sheer nonsense.

The truth is, thousands and thousands of genetic experiments will
continue to be performed, in the dark, based on a very small amount of
knowledge. The grotesque results will be cast aside as unfortunate
casualties in the march toward The New World.

DNA isn’t the key to “a better human.” Individual freedom and power
are, and they launch a process of living and thinking and imagining and
creating that can’t be short-circuited. Can’t be synthesized or
fabricated.

The philosophy of Scientism is the current paradigm. It extrapolates
from the sciences and molds political, economic, and psychological
norms that propagate totalitarian societies, based on an absurd
materialist view of the human.

The awareness you have, at this moment, of being alive is not a
function of DNA or the brain. Nothing contained in those structures can
account for such awareness. Not the atoms, the electrons, the protons,
the nuclei, the quarks, mesons, wavicles…

But genetic research can be used a cover story to demand a planet
with one huge underclass and a few “enlightened” rulers. Which is what
is happening now.

Jon RappoportThe author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th
District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private
clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative
power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative
reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and
health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other
newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered
lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative
power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails
at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Intellectual Center Reviews

Intellectual Center provides Independent News in blog format to assist other activists, teachers, and elders with alternative news, information on social issues, and research material.

FAIR USE NOTICE: Intellectual Center (Website) may post copyrighted material not specifically authorized in accordance with Section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law allowing purposes associating learning processes. Please be advised if you intend to use such copyrighted material for personal reasons beyond "fair use," considerations, please obtain permission from the copyright owner. Learning processes encompass a vast array of issues of concern and would not be restrictive, it would offer critique and extended scholarly research.

Website may display third party authors/advertising which may not represent the views or opinions of Website or contributors. Advertisements are not endorsed as such and are intended as alternative ways to support the work at Website.